People learn at different speeds. But 1300 players are almost certainly not cheating...
There's no way a person who has only been playing for a couple of days could be rated 1300 legitimately.
Why?
Because you simply could not reach that level in two days from "scratch".
What sort of skills does it take to reach a 1300 level..? Not hanging stuff every move? 
Queenmary, it is possible that you are wrong, but its also possible that she can have used a mentor or an engine. I just cant tell. I choose to belive that she is ok, because there is no evidence for anything bad.
The two games i looked at looked like a good player were meeting beginners.
Well, but back to the original question. The OP has a serious point!
I just became member of this site because many of my friends keep telling me to go and play chess online to get more experience.
But my main concern is that I have some friends that I know are sitting with their ipads and smartphones while playing online and they're running chessaps and whatnot to see the best moves and not fall in to tactics and combinations.
How do you know if this is the case? How can you prevent people from playing the same game simultaneously on an ipad just to see what the best moves are? They might not play the best move every time, but they can pick the next best or the third best option.
This is why I didn't make an acccount before just right now. But I wanna know how to reveal if someone is cheating.
Thanks in advance for your reply.
It will be obvious. 99/100 times they won't be.
Hypercube, I have another angel. If somebody are using engine, its not my problem. I only expeience hard opposition, and learn from that.
Hypercube; sounds like its time to get some new friends. A computer, an ipad, and a smart phone. All to win a game of on-line chess?? What am I missing here?? GET A LIFE!!
Ratings are largely meaningless when just a few games have been played. It takes twenty or thirty games for the initial rating to settle at anything like the person's true strength - and that is if they are playing opponents at close to their current rating (stronger if they are winning, weaker if they are losing). If they play friends or always play weak opponents or always strong opponents it will take many more games before the rating means anything.
Ratings are also pretty meaningless with young people (who can improve very rapidly indeed) or with people who prove to have aptitude. I am just finishing a chess.com tournament which had an 1800 cap upon entry. In the third round I have been playing players now rated 2200/2300.
The notion that it is possible to infer cheating from someone's rating or from their opponents view of the moves they play in a game is daft. Why so many of those who post in these forums subscribe to this daft view I don't know. I fear it must say something (not very flattering) about those of us who like to post here.
Tough day at work today honey. It took 3 phones and 6 computers but I WON that game of Battleship.
She really isn't a 1340 player, glicko ratings take a long time to become remotely accurate. She hasn't beaten anyone over 1000 yet. I analyzed one of her games with Fritz and her moves are certainly not computer generated, her opponents hang their pieces and she takes them. She may have a knack for chess, naturally good board vision.
Indeed many chess prodigies simply learn the rules of the game and it takes a while to find someone who can beat them.
Just play chess and don't worry about it, especially until you have a high rating. It happens but is exaggerated, and most engine users wont have a low rating for obvious reasons.
There are people who spend their lives in the cheating forum trying to find people who are using engines. I just don't understand it.
Well for starters, running an app to check your moves is a little hard for me to grasp.
@ RonaldJosephCote: No, don't think so. She's from Argentinia (the person i played with)
I don't get how someone who has won 11 of 11 has a rating of just 1340 unless she played against people with pretty low ratings. I'm new here and just won my first 2 games against people with ratings of about 1000 and 1200. My rating shot up from 1200 to 1397.
Yes she is only playing people with triple digit ratings so she doesn't gain much on a win.
@ Bartwick: yes, but she played mostly with people under 800 i saw! Than you will not gain that much. Don't understand it.
This site has software that detects chess engines even if its not move for move it will determine right after the game and give them a warning
There are threads on sandbagging, there are threads on cheating, hell there's a forum on cheating. If you think you've been cheated in any game, NEVER say anything about it in public. Submit a ticket to staff with all the pertinent info, a link, date, time, place, etc. Staff will not do anything on 1 accusation, but they will look at the overall pattern. That person may have more than 1 accusation. If it plays out to be true, then the person is banned, no questions asked. But be advised; its very hard to PROVE a person is cheating. Chess.com takes this seriously, and that's why it should be done behind closed doors. If it took cheating to beat you; you must be pretty dam good. Hope that helps!
1. Become a better chess player
2. Play someone else.
3. Stop crying and get a life (and/or maybe a girlfriend/boyfriend).
I staightly go to a psychiatrist to be drugged myself.
Love..
About rating. The startingpoint is 1200, and I think you pop up to above 1300 if you win your first game. After that it is possible to hold that rating if you only play lowrated players and avoid loosing. I popped up to 1620 after 3,4 or 5 games, and after that i met only strong players and fell down to around 1330, before starting a long slow climb